Habitat degradation is threatening reef replenishment by making fish fearless
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Habitat degradation is one of the 'Big Five' drivers of biodiversity loss. However, the mechanisms responsible for this progressive loss of biodiversity are poorly understood. In marine ecosystems, corals play the role of ecosystem engineers, providing essential habitat for hundreds of thousands of species and hence their health is crucial to the stability of the whole ecosystem. Climate change is causing coral bleaching and degradation, and while this has been known for a while, little do we know about the cascading consequences of these events on the complex interrelationships between predators and their prey. The goal of our study was to investigate, under completely natural conditions, the effect of coral degradation on predator-prey interactions. Settlement stage ambon damselfish (Pomacentrus amboinensis), a common tropical fish, were released on patches of healthy or dead corals, and their behaviours in situ were measured, along with their response to injured conspecific cues, a common risk indicator. This study also explored the effect of habitat degradation on natural levels of mortality at a critical life-history transition. We found that juveniles in dead corals displayed risk-prone behaviours, sitting further away and higher up on the reef patch, and failed to respond to predation cues, compared to those on live coral patches. In addition, in situ survival experiments over 48 h indicated that juveniles on dead coral habitats had a 75% increase in predation-related mortality, compared to fish released on live, healthy coral habitats. Our results provide the first of many potential mechanisms through which habitat degradation can impact the relationship between prey and predators in the coral reef ecosystem. As the proportion of dead coral increases, the recruitment and replenishment of coral reef fishes will be threatened, and so will the level of diversity in these biodiversity hot spots.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".